Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

EU chief can’t find texts with Pfizer CEO

Samizdat | June 30, 2022

The European Commission said it is unable to locate text messages sent between its president, Ursula von der Leyen, and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla during talks for a massive vaccine deal last year, but denied prior charges of “maladministration” from an EU watchdog.

The commission issued a letter on Wednesday stating that an expanded search for the missing messages had “not yielded any results,” following months of dispute between the EU’s executive body and oversight officials. It argued that due to the “short-lived and ephemeral nature” of texts, they typically “do not contain important information” and are therefore rarely stored.

While von der Leyen revealed in an April 2021 interview that she and Bourla privately communicated for several weeks while negotiating a contract for nearly 2 billion vaccine doses, a journalist’s public information request for the texts was later shot down, with the commission claiming it could not find the messages in question.

The denial triggered a rebuke from the European ombudsman, Emily O’Reilly, who followed up with an investigation last year and blasted EU officials over poor administration and a lack of transparency, saying that “no attempt was made to identify if any text messages existed.” The ombudsman then urged the commission to “search again,” asking it to broaden its criteria in a way that might actually locate the records.

The commission doubled down in its latest response to O’Reilly, however, insisting it had handled the matter properly and made every effort to find the texts. It reiterated that it does not register material that contains no “important information,” and that such documents “are not kept, and, as a consequence, are not in the possession of the institution.”

“The European Commission is of the opinion that it has not treated this request in a ‘narrow way’ and that the search and handling of documents for the purpose of public requests for access to documents … is justified and follows the established practice,” it continued.

The body added that it intends to “issue further guidance on modern communication tools” in hopes of avoiding similar mix-ups in the future, but nonetheless held that its actions were “in line with the applicable legislation and the relevant case law on access to documents.”

The office of the ombudsman, which published the commission’s letter on Wednesday, declared that the response was “problematic on several points,” and noted that a “full analysis” of the case would follow in the coming weeks.

The controversy over the missing texts is not the first dispute regarding a lack of transparency in the EU’s vaccine dealings, as the commission was sued in April by several MEPs, who claimed the negotiations were overly secretive. Though contracts were eventually published, they were heavily redacted in a way that “made it impossible to understand the content of the agreements,” the lawmakers alleged, insisting secrecy “has no place in public agreements with pharmaceutical companies.”

June 30, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , | 1 Comment

Zelensky demands $5 billion “every month” from NATO, cites security in Europe

Samizdat | June 29, 2022

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has urged the US-led NATO bloc to ramp up support of his country amid the ongoing conflict with Russia, claiming that Kiev’s defeat would result in a “delayed” war between Moscow and the whole West. Zelensky made the remarks as he addressed the NATO summit in Madrid via a video link on Wednesday.

“It’s either urgent aid to Ukraine sufficient for victory, or a delayed war between Russia and you,” Zelensky told NATO leaders.

The country needs both direct military and financial aid, Zelensky stated, adding that some $5 billion a month was needed to cover its budget deficit. Top Ukrainian officials have repeatedly called upon the West to provide financial support.

“Financial aid for Ukraine has no less significance than arms deliveries,” Zelensky said. “We need some $5 billon every month, you know that. And this is a fundamental thing, needed for defense and protection.”

To help Ukraine now end this war with a victory on the battlefield, that is, to give a really strong response to Russia’s actions – this is what we, and the entire alliance, the whole Euro-Atlantic community need.

Once the conflict is over, Ukraine must be provided with a decent place in the Western security architecture, Zelensky insisted, rejecting the prospect of Ukraine remaining in a “gray zone” between Russia and the NATO bloc. “We need security guarantees, and you must find a place for Ukraine in the common security space,” he stressed.

Russia sent troops into Ukraine on February 24, citing Kiev’s failure to implement the Minsk agreements, designed to give the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk special status within the Ukrainian state. The protocols, brokered by Germany and France, were first signed in 2014. Former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has since admitted that Kiev’s main goal was to use the ceasefire to buy time and “create powerful armed forces.”

In February 2022, the Kremlin recognized the Donbass republics as independent states and demanded that Ukraine officially declare itself a neutral country that will never join any Western military bloc. Kiev insists the Russian offensive was completely unprovoked.

June 29, 2022 Posted by | Corruption | , , | 5 Comments

Experts Urge Caution as American Academy of Pediatrics Calls for Mental Health Screenings for Newborns to 21-Year-Olds

By Martha Rosenberg | The Defender | June 27, 2022

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) this month added recommendations for preventive pediatric healthcare to its 2022 Periodicity Schedule, also known as Bright Futures — including the recommendation to “screen for depression and suicide risk” annually in children starting at birth and up to 21 years.

With experts warning of a mental health crisis among children and adolescents, the AAP’s recommendation, at least on the surface, may seem sound and reasonable.

But depression screening can be dangerous, some experts say.

Dr. Allen Frances, professor and chairman emeritus of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Duke University School of Medicine, in 2016 told The Wall Street Journal that depression screening risks medicalization of the “normal” and that “teens may be haunted for life by carelessly applied labels.”

Dr. Edmund Levin, who specializes in adolescent psychiatry, wrote in Adolescent Psychiatry, “Over-diagnosis needs to be considered as a contributor to the trend of increasing percentages of youth being diagnosed and medicated for a variety of mental health conditions, including depression.”

And according to 2019 research in the journal Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences, overmedication is often seen in children in foster care, children from distressed families and those in the juvenile justice system or residential treatment programs.

Psychiatric medications for children have their place on the continuum of treatment options, but could the AAP’s new recommendation result in many more children being prescribed lucrative and dangerous psychiatric drugs — some of which can cause suicide, especially in children, according to their own labels?

The AAP describes itself as “an organization of 67,000 primary care pediatricians, pediatric medical subspecialists and pediatric surgical specialists dedicated to the health, safety and well-being of infants, children, adolescents and young adults.”

Yet a quick look at its top donors reveals companies whose products may sometimes conflict with the “health, safety and well-being of infants, children, adolescents and young adults.”

These include Ronald McDonald House Charities, the biotech giant Sanofi Genzyme, baby powder maker Johnson & Johnson (among the AAP’s “top 10 donors”) and the drugmakers AbbottMerck and Novavax.

The AAP is hardly the only well-respected medical association to play both sides of the street — taking drugmaker money while giving “trusted” medical advice.

Nor is it the only association to establish detailed recommendations and screenings for patients — screenings that often directly enrich drugmakers.

For example, “TeenScreen,” a program at Columbia University in New York City that ran from 2003 until 2012, offered free psychiatric services to screen children for suicidal tendencies and emotional problems.

Directed by Leslie McGuire, formerly a leader at the drug industry-funded National Alliance on Mental Illness, TeenScreen “routed [children] into ‘mental health’ treatment,’” wrote the Idaho Observer.

“Many of these would be ‘treated’ with psychiatric drugs, ignoring the fact that many of these very same drugs carry Black Box warning labels, mandated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) because they are known to cause violence and suicide.”

According to the Alliance for Human Research Protection, TeenScreen, which folded in 2012, was a “highly controversial, aggressive, medically dubious mental health screening protocol developed with federal funding…”

AAP not new to marketing problematic drugs

In 2015, Fox News reported the AAP helped Merck market its asthma drug Singulair (montelukast) to children.

“Merck teamed up with kid-friendly groups like Scholastic Press and [gave] money to the American Academy of Pediatrics to train doctors on ‘diagnosing’ and prescribing ‘proper medication’ for asthma,” wrote Fox reporter Tisha Thompson.

The marketing partnerships presented two problems — the obvious conflicts of interest inherent in trusted organizations promoting the sale of prescription drugs for private companies, and the promotion of what turned out to be a drug with a very concerning safety profile.

On Sept. 27, 2019, the FDA held a joint meeting of the Pediatric and Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committees to address growing reports of neuropsychiatric events caused by montelukast in pediatric patients.

The meeting included a lot of talk about black-box warnings.

Testifying at the hearings were parents whose children had experienced severe harm and even killed themselves on the asthma drug.

The parents, who came from groups like the Montelukast Side Effects Support and Discussion Group and Parents United for Pharmaceutical Safety and Accountability, asserted that a black-box warning, not yet added to the montelukast label, would prevent future tragedies.

At the time, the montelukast label warned only against “neuropsychiatric events.”

The parents were successful. On March 4, 2020, the FDA decided to add a “boxed warning” to montelukast due to “an elevated concern regarding the risk of neuropsychiatric events, including suicidal thoughts and actions.”

In a statement provided to Fox News about the conflict of interest, the AAP wrote:

“The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Comprehensive Asthma Program is an independent program promoting the evidence-based guidelines for asthma care from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). The incidence of asthma in children — especially minority children living in poverty — is steadily increasing.

“The goal of this program is to improve the care of children with asthma by helping pediatricians adopt the NHLBI guidelines in their practices, within the context of a medical home, thereby reducing the rates of emergency department visits, hospitalizations and deaths in children with uncontrolled asthma.”

An educational grant to provide funding came from the Merck Childhood Asthma Network Inc., a non-profit, 501(c)(3) organization headed by Dr. Floyd Malveaux that is separate from Merck & Co.

The AAP told Fox News:

“The grant provided $651,530 from 2008 through 2011. While the sponsor provided funding for the Comprehensive Asthma Program through an educational grant, the content was determined solely by the AAP, using guidelines from the NHLBI. It is not a conflict of interest. By accepting external grants like this, the AAP is able to disseminate its educational messages to mass audiences.”

Three years after the Singulair scandal, Knight Science Journalism Fellow and Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and MedPage Today reporter John Fauber reported on another suspicious AAP partnership — the AAP endorsed guidelines that recommended particular acne drugs when 13 members on a 15-member panel were “paid consultants or speakers for companies that make the drugs.”

According to Fauber, the co-chairs of the acne guidelines panel that the AAP relied on — Diane Thiboutot, professor of dermatology at Penn State-Hershey, and Lawrence Eichenfield, pediatric dermatologist at the University of California, San Diego School of Medicine — had worked as consultants or speakers for Galderma, the manufacturer of a recommended acne drug.


Martha Rosenberg is a nationally recognized medical reporter. Her work appears in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), Consumer Reports, Public Citizen, Center for Health Journalism at USC Annenberg, Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University and other top outlets.

© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

June 28, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

WHO Recommends New Gates-Funded Polio Vaccine to Address Vaccine-Derived Polio Outbreak in U.K.

By Megan Redshaw | The Defender | June 27, 2022

Health officials in the U.K. this month identified the country’s first polio outbreak in 40 years, and believe the outbreak was caused by a strain of polio found in the oral polio vaccine.

Health officials in Britain warned parents on June 22 to ensure their children have been vaccinated against polio after multiple closely related versions of the virus that cause the disease were found in sewage water at the London Beckton Sewage Treatment Works — the largest water treatment plant in the U.K.

“The Global Polio Laboratory Network has confirmed the isolation of type 2 vaccine-derived poliovirus (VDPV2) from environmental samples in London, United Kingdom, which were detected as part of ongoing disease surveillance,” the World Health Organization (WHO) states on its website.

The U.K. Health Security Agency (UKHSA) said it believes the virus was “vaccine-derived,” meaning it came from someone who received the live polio vaccine. That person then passed the virus to individuals in London, who shed the virus into their feces.

The viruses’ genetic sequences suggest “there has been some spread between closely linked individuals in north and east London,” the UKHSA said.

The virus was isolated from environmental samples collected between February and May, and no related cases of paralysis have been detected, the WHO said. “Additional sewage samples collected upstream from the main waste-water treatment plant’s inlet are being analyzed.”

People vaccinated with the live oral polio vaccine (OPV) shed traces of the virus in their stool — which eventually end up in sewage wastewater, NPR reported. Scientists believe a person brought the virus into London and then spread it to others who were unvaccinated.

“We are urgently investigating to better understand the extent of this transmission,” Vanessa Saliba, an epidemiologist who consults for the UKHSA, said in the statement.

The risk to the general public is thought to be “extremely low” but the agency encourages anyone not fully vaccinated to receive a polio vaccine.

WHO approves Gates’ oral polio vaccine for emergency use

The WHO on Nov. 13, 2020, granted Emergency Use Listing (EUL) to a new novel oral polio vaccine called nOPV2, designed to treat the type of polio outbreak occurring in the U.K.

Based on the WHO’s review of data and research available on nOPV2, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) recommended Gates’ nOPV2 become the “vaccine of choice” for responding to type 2 polio outbreaks caused by OPV.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation provided 100% of the funding for the development and clinical trials of the vaccine.

The Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) states on its website:

“The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has funded all development and clinical trials of nOPV2 to date, working closely with GPEI partners throughout the process to ensure resources are going toward a tool that could prove critical to helping end all forms of polio.

“Based on promising data from clinical trials, and the public health emergency that cVDPV2 [vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2] constitutes, the Foundation is funding at-risk production of 160 million doses of nOPV2 to ensure it can be deployed immediately following the issuance of WHO’s interim Emergency Use Listing (EUL) recommendation for use.”

“The emergency use listing, or EUL, is the first of its kind for a vaccine” designed to “pave the way for potential listing of COVID-19 vaccines,” the WHO said on its website.

On December 31, 2020, the WHO issued its first EUL listing for a COVID-19 vaccine. According to the WHO, the agency granted the listing for the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine.

The EUL is a regulatory pathway that allows the WHO — whose second-largest financial donor is the Gates Foundation — to distribute an unlicensed product for a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern,” which the organization claims polio has been since 2014.

The EUL allows vaccines and medicines to be made available more quickly to address health emergencies, without long-term phase 3 data, and is the same mechanism used for distribution of Zika, Ebola and COVID-19 vaccines.

According to the WHO, in “very rare cases,” the administration of OPV results in vaccine-associated paralytic polio associated with a “reversion of the vaccine strains to the more neurovirulent profile of wild poliovirus.”

In addition to causing vaccine-associated paralytic polio, vaccine strains have the capacity to cause disease of the nervous system and to transmit from person to person resulting in infectious poliomyelitis.

Based on the WHO’s review of data and research available on nOPV2, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) recommended Gates’ nOPV2 become the “vaccine of choice” for responding to type 2 polio outbreaks caused by OPV.

According to the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI), the nOPV2 was developed to address vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 outbreaks, which “can emerge when the weakened strain of the vaccine virus circulates in under-immunized populations and, with time, can genetically revert into a form that causes paralysis.”

In other words, “under-immunized” populations — not the OPV — are to blame for the vaccine-related polio strains.

In an email to The Defender, Dr. Brian Hooker, Ph.D., P.E., Children’s Health Defense chief scientific officer and professor of biology at Simpson University said:

“Once again, Big Pharma, fueled by the Gates Foundation, has created a huge problem that only they can solve. The introduction of the new OPV in the U.K. has predictably led to polio virus in the sewage (i.e., where poliovirus propagates) and now the “only solution” is to inject U.K. citizens with the nPOV2 to prevent the spread of OPV-induced polio. If this isn’t a scam, I don’t know what is!”

The U.K.’s Medicines and Regulatory Health Products Agency (MHRA) on June 17 said in a tweet: “An exciting new global study, co-authored by our lead scientist Javier Martin, shows that new polio vaccine nOPV2 is an effective tool in reducing the risk of Vaccine-Derived Polio Viruses.“

The tweet linked to a study published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advocating for the use of Gates’ nOPV2 vaccine.

Between the launch of nOPV2 in March 2021 and late May 2022,  more than 350 million doses had been administered across 18 countries.

The GPEI confirmed, as of May 30, 16 other countries are “ready to use nOPV2” and an additional 17 are in the midst of preparations.

WHO, GPEI and other organizations pushing Gates-funded vaccine

According to UNICEF, the GPEI is a public-private partnership led by national governments with six core partners: Rotary International, the WHO, the CDC, UNICEF, the Gates Foundation and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance.

The Gates Foundation, in addition to funding the nPOV2 vaccine, GPEI and the WHO, also funds Rotary InternationalUNICEFGavi and the CDC Foundation.

The entity in charge of monitoring vaccine adverse events following administraton of nPOV2  is the WHO’s own Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS).

“The GACVS Sub-Committee on nOPV2 Safety will advise WHO and its Member States on safety outcomes following the use of initially pre-licensed type 2 novel oral poliovirus vaccine, during the EUL period, prior to the availability of Phase III clinical trial results,” according to GPEI.

In essence, the Gates Foundation funded the creation, development and clinical trials for the new nPOV2 polio vaccine, funds the organizations that administered millions of doses to be given under EUL without any long-term data, funds the organizations implementing its roll-out and surveillance and funds the entity monitoring adverse events associated with nPOV2’s use.

The Gates Foundation is also a funder of NPR and NPR’s blog, which have published numerous articles on VDPV2 and paved the way for Gates’ nPOV2 vaccine as the solution.

Oral polio v. inactivated polio vaccines

According to the WHO, the original OPV uses a mixture of “live attenuated poliovirus strains of each of the three serotypes,” selected for their ability to mimic the immune system’s response following infection with wild polioviruses, but with a reduced chance of spreading to the central nervous system.

To achieve the desired immune response, three or more doses of OPV are required spaced out over a period of time.

The U.S. and some western countries use an inactivated (killed) polio vaccine (IPV) developed by Dr. Jonas Salk and first used in 1955.

Scientists claim the inactivated virus poses no risk of spread, although the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting system shows two reported cases of poliomyelitis reported following vaccination with IPV.

The U.S. stopped using OPV in 2000 because it caused paralytic polio.

According to NPR, countries in Africa, the Middle East and parts of Asia are experiencing a rise in cases of vaccine-derived polio. These countries mostly use the OPV developed by Albert Sabin and first used in 1961.

Gates’ nOPV2 vaccine  is a modified version of Sabin’s existing OPV vaccine.

“The spread of vaccine-derived polio virus from OPV vaccine in multiple countries throughout Africa and Asia resulted in 1,612 cases of paralytic polio from 2017 through 2020,” Dr. Liz Mumper, pediatrician and former medical director of the Autism Research Institute told The Defender.

“Since these polio virus samples are in wastewater in a developed country, those who have access to clean water should not be at risk,” Mumper said. “However, the media is raising alarms. This is a setback for the Global Polio Eradication Initiative.”

According to the CDC, three cases of paralytic polio caused by the OPV vaccine have been reported in the U.S. since the vaccine was discontinued in 2000.

The CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, or VAERS, shows 66 reports of polio following administration of the OPV.

VAERS also shows 14 reported cases of poliomyelitis following vaccination with IPV. Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.


Megan Redshaw is a staff attorney for Children’s Health Defense and a reporter for The Defender.

© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

June 27, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , , | 1 Comment

Why is the government getting into bed with Moderna?

By Kathy Gyngell | TCW Defending Freedom | June 27, 2022

WITH all eyes on the dramatic ‘return of polio’ headlines of last Wednesday and Thursday, a far more significant piece of news was slipped out. It was announced that the Government was partnering with Moderna to open a large research and manufacturing centre in Britain which ‘will develop cutting-edge mRNA vaccines for a wide range of respiratory diseases, including Covid-19 vaccines that can protect against multiple variants, helping to future-proof the UK against potential emerging health threats’.

Lucky NHS patients are to have access to the ‘next generation’ of mRNA vaccines and treatments. ‘The centre will be able to scale up production rapidly in the event of a health emergency, significantly boosting the UK’s ability to respond to future pandemics.’

This worrying press release requires careful reading. It reveals an astonishing gung-ho and uncritical approach to mRNA Covid vaccines in view of their now proven limited or even zero efficacy, and the high rate of recorded adverse events, injuries and deaths associated with them and in particular with the Moderna brand.

It does not tell us how much the Government is investing in this planned ‘mRNA Innovation and Technology Centre’ or where all the money is coming from. From the Centre for Epidemic Preparedness and Innovation (CEPI), the organisation which put up the money for Moderna’s fast-tracked Covid vaccine, that the UK already pays into? Or will some of the billions Moderna has made on the back of their ‘gene therapy’ covid vaccines be invested?

Something was to be gleaned from an interview with the Health Secretary on Wednesday’s BBC Radio 4 PM programme. Evan Davis asked Sajid Javid what Moderna would get in return for their billion-pound investment. ‘Well,’ said Javid, ‘the government’s agreed to buy Moderna’s vaccines, the mRNA ones, for the next decade’. (My italics)

Why on earth would the Government think it right to make such a commitment for new-technology vaccines as yet untested, that we may not need, to a get-rich-quick company that has serious questions to answer about exactly how it created its Covid vaccine so rapidly.

Why, as already touched on, would the government be making such a huge commitment to the producer of the vaccine that gets by far the highest Yellow Card adverse reaction reporting rate in the UK? (The official figures are: Pfizer – 1 in 157 people impacted, AstraZeneca – 1 in 101 people impacted, Moderna – 1 in 43 people impacted.) These represent the immediate risks recipients are exposed to but the technology is so new that there remains a complete absence of understanding of any long-term risks, and apparently no follow-up mechanism to study them.

In this interview we also learnt that it was, in Javid’s words, ‘a huge deal’, and that yes, what Moderna got out of it was a captive and secure market for pretty much whatever vaccines they choose to produce.

‘We all saw during the pandemic the power of vaccines, the difference that they can make. And in particular, with this new technology called mRNA, this platform, we saw how it has literally saved millions of lives during the pandemic. And this technology is transformational. And under this deal, what will be happening is that Moderna will be opening both a global R&D centre here in the UK, carrying out lots of the clinical trials. But also they’ll be building a manufacturing facility here in the UK for vaccines, that will be their largest outside of the United States. So it’s over a . . . well over a billion pounds of investment. It’s a huge vote of confidence in our life sciences industry. But how it matters most of all to me as the Health Secretary is that it will mean that we in the UK, NHS patients, will have guaranteed access to future vaccines and treatments from this exciting mRNA platform. And what that means, it’s more than just Covid or flu, it means that the future sort of health needs in terms of cancer and dementia, cardiovascular disease, you know, these are all things that hold huge potential from this investment’.

When Davis pressed: ‘I’m interested in what they get out of it, because you say obviously our regulators would have to approve any vaccine that we buy from them . . . but we have guaranteed purchases, haven’t we?’ Javid agreed: ‘Yeah, let me explain that. So what we will do is we’ll sign a contract with them which will say, basically, that if you create drugs that our regulator approves and that we actually want for our health system, then we will buy those drugs. And in return what we get in the UK is, is this huge investment and guaranteed access.’

His economic sense appeared to have gone quite astray at this point. What favour Moderna would be doing us if they are to be provided with a promised captive market? Of course we will have ‘guaranteed access’! And why the UK when Europe represents a much bigger market and we no longer have access to the EU single market?

Unfortunately Davis did not ask to whom the £395 million government  investment mentioned in the press release ‘to secure and scale up the UK’s vaccine manufacturing capabilities’ has gone to or goes to. To Moderna?

Looking at the updates to Moderna’s confidentiality agreements released to Axios, they appear to be  trying to diversify into the existing market for childhood vaccines and are gearing up to roll out mRNA vaccines for measles and mumps and perhaps now polio and other viruses.

The very real fear is that the MHRA will follow the US Food and Drug Administration’s approach of rapid rubberstamping for new products deemed to be ‘biosimilar’ to existing products authorised on that ‘platform’. Thus minimal testing will be required, the products will get MHRA approval more easily than traditional vaccines, and our children risk being guinea pigs again. The regulatory safeguards for these products that industry sees as ‘red tape’ have been built up over decades to protect users but are now being set aside. Additionally US pharmaceutical companies have absolute protection under US law for liability for defectively designed children’s vaccines. Will the UK now give them the same indemnities?

Mr Johnson’s and Mr Javid’s shared enthusiasm for this novel technology is in direct conflict with the precautionary principle. Either they have not caught up with or are in denial about the extent of the health issues surrounding mRNA vaccination.

If Johnson’s and Javid’s naivete can be excused, Sir Patrick Vallance, the Government Chief Scientific Adviser, must know better. Yet here he is in the press release cheering on the project: ‘The establishment of the Moderna mRNA Innovation and Technology Centre is great news for the UK’s research and development activities and future capabilities. Rapid cutting-edge vaccines were vital in the response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Developing the next generation of mRNA vaccines will be crucial in boosting our ability to prevent and respond to a wide range of diseases in the future.’

Not so fast, Sir Patrick and Mr Javid. This is not what the latest mRNA vaccine research evidence suggests at all.  A study which summarises the current literature on mRNA and its effects published this month concludes that ‘the many alterations in the vaccine mRNA hide the mRNA from cellular defences and promote a longer biological half-life and high production of spike protein’ causing innate immune suppression. The research paper presents evidence that vaccination induces a profound impairment in type I interferon signalling, which has diverse adverse consequences to human health and says: ‘We believe a comprehensive risk/benefit assessment of the mRNA vaccines questions them as positive contributors to public health.’

The cynic might say that what the next generation of mRNA vaccines will be crucial in is weakening our natural immunity, compromising our ability to combat disease ourselves while subjecting us and the next generation of children with reckless indifference to unknown health risks.

June 27, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Al Gore stuffed millions into his lockbox while saving the world

By Jon Rappoport | No More Fake News | June 24, 2022

Since climate change has once again risen to the top of the charts, as an issue of “deep concern,” I’m reposting my piece about Al Gore from several years ago:

Freeman Dyson, physicist and mathematician, professor emeritus at Princeton’s Institute for Advanced Study, Fellow of the Royal Society, winner of the Lorentz Medal, the Max Planck Medal, the Fermi Award: “What has happened in the past 10 years is that the discrepancies [in climate change models] between what’s observed and what’s predicted have become much stronger. It’s clear now the models are wrong, but it wasn’t so clear 10 years ago… I’m 100 per cent Democrat myself, and I like Obama. But he took the wrong side on this [climate change] issue, and the Republicans took the right side…” (The Register, October 11, 2015)

Dr. Ivar Giaever, Nobel-prize winner in Physics (1973), reported by Climate Depot, July 8, 2015: “Global warming is a non-problem… I say this to Obama: Excuse me, Mr. President, but you’re wrong. Dead wrong.”

Green Guru James Lovelock, who once predicted imminent destruction of the planet via global warming: “The computer models just weren’t reliable. In fact, I’m not sure the whole thing isn’t crazy, this climate change.” (The Guardian, September 30, 2016)

And these are but a tiny fraction of the statements made by dissident scientists who reject manmade global warming.

The science is only settled in government circles where leaders have climbed on board the Globalist plan to undermine economies all over the world by grossly lowering energy production, as a way to “reduce warming.”

One of the major warming hustlers is, of course, Al Gore.

Consider facts laid out in an uncritical Washington Post story (October 10, 2012, “Al Gore has thrived as a green-tech investor”):

In 2001, Al was worth less than $2 million. By 2012, it was estimated he’d locked up a nice neat $100 million.

How did he do it? Well, he invested in 14 green companies, who inhaled — via loans, grants and tax relief — somewhere in the neighborhood of $2.5 billion from the Federal government to go greener.

Therefore, Gore’s investments paid off, because the Federal government was providing massive cash backup to those companies. It’s nice to have Federal friends in high places.

For example, Gore’s investment firm at one point held 4.2 million shares of an outfit called Iberdrola Renovables, which was building 20 wind farms across the United States.

Iberdrola was blessed with $1.5 billion from the Federal government for the work which, by its own admission, saved its corporate financial bacon. Every little bit helps.

Then there was a company called Johnson Controls. It made batteries, including those for electric cars. Gore’s investment company, Generation Investment Management (GIM), doubled its holdings in Johnson Controls in 2008, when shares cost as little $9 a share. GIM sold when shares cost $21 to $26.

Note: Johnson Controls had been bolstered by $299 million dropped at its doorstep by the administration of President Barack Obama.

On the side, Gore had been giving speeches on the end of life as we know it on planet Earth, for as much as $175,000 a pop. (It wasn’t really on the side. Gore was constantly on the move from conference to conference, spewing jet fumes in his wake.) Those lecture fees can add up.

So Gore, as of 2012, had $100 million.

The man has worked every angle to parlay fear of global-warming catastrophes into a humdinger of a personal fortune. And he didn’t achieve his new status in the free market. The Federal government has been helping out with major, major bucks.

This wasn’t an entrepreneur relying exclusively on his own smarts and hard work. Far from it.

— How many scientists and other PhDs have been just saying no to the theory of manmade global warming?

A letter to The Wall Street Journal signed by 16 scientists just said no. Among the luminaries: William Happer, professor of physics at Princeton University; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences at Massachusetts Institute of Technology; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology.

And then there was the Global Warming Petition Project, or the Oregon Petition, that just said no. According to Petitionproject.org, the petition has the signatures of “31,487 American scientists,” of which 9,029 stated they had Ph.D.s.

Global warming is one of the Rockefeller Globalists’ chief issues. Manipulating it entails convincing populations that a massive intervention is necessary to stave off the imminent collapse of all life on Earth. Therefore, sovereign nations must be eradicated. Political power and decision-making must flow from above, from “those who are wiser.”

Al Gore is one of their front men.

He jets here and he jets there, carrying their messages. He’s their delivery kid.

And for his work, he is paid $100 million — a drop in the bucket.

Globalists want all national governments on the planet to commit to lowering energy production by a significant and destructive percentage in the next 15 years—“to save us from a horrible fate.”

Their real agenda is clear: The only solution to climate change is a global energy-management network. Globalist leaders are in the best position to manage such a system. They’ll mandate FAR LOWER energy-use levels throughout planet Earth, region by region, nation by nation, and eventually, citizen by citizen.

Yes, citizen by citizen.

This is the long-term goal. This is the Globalists’ Holy Grail.

Slavery imposed through energy.

June 27, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | 1 Comment

ACIP discussed Moneypox drugs and vaccines at yesterday’s meeting and were lied to about both by CDC

By Meryl Nass, MD | June 24, 2022

3 Drugs that might be used for money pox

1. BrincidofovirBrincidofovir is licensed (since 1996) for treatment of smallpox but is not available in the US stockpile (termed the National Strategic Stockpile) and CDC is considering obtaining an expanded access IND (a legal permission from FDA to test/use it in people) so that it could legally be used if needed. But it could be used off-label, since it is licensed. Why is CDC jumping through unnecessary hoops? Probably in order to control the supply, in a similar though not identical manner to what FDA did with donated hydroxychloroquine.

2. TPOXX, the controversial drug made by SIGA Technologies. When the Obama administration first tried to buy this drug, Congress had a fit and the media helped blow up the deal. From David Willman, writing for the LA Times in 2011:

Over the last year, the Obama administration has aggressively pushed a $433-million plan to buy an experimental smallpox drug, despite uncertainty over whether it is needed or will work.

Senior officials have taken unusual steps to secure the contract for New York-based Siga Technologies Inc., whose controlling shareholder is billionaire Ronald O. Perelman, one of the world’s richest men and a longtime Democratic Party donor.

When Siga complained that contracting specialists at the Department of Health and Human Services were resisting the company’s financial demands, senior officials replaced the government’s lead negotiator for the deal, interviews and documents show.

When Siga was in danger of losing its grip on the contract a year ago, the officials blocked other firms from competing…

Negotiations over the price of the drug and Siga’s profit margin were contentious. In an internal memo in March, Dr. Richard J. Hatchett, chief medical officer for HHS’ biodefense preparedness unit, said Siga’s projected profit at that point was 180%, which he called “outrageous.”

So the Obama administration simply waited out the media storm, and bought the drug for $30 million more in 2013. Here is what the NYT said about it in 2013, when the purchase was finalized:

The United States government is buying enough of a new smallpox medicine to treat two million people in the event of a bioterrorism attack, and took delivery of the first shipment of it last week. But the purchase has set off a debate about the lucrative contract, with some experts saying the government is buying too much of the drug at too high a price.

A small company, Siga Technologies, developed the drug in recent years. Whether the $463 million order is a boondoggle or bargain depends on which expert is talking…

Dr. Henderson and Dr. Philip Russell, who formerly headed the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research and served on the advisory panel with him, said they expected the government to pay much less for an antiviral drug since they cost little to make and the alternative, vaccines, cost the government $3 a dose. “If they’re talking $250 a course, they’re a bunch of thieves,” Dr. Russell said.

Asked how much TPOXX (Tecovirimat) and 3. Vaccinia Immune Globulin there is in the stockpile, the CDC’s Dr. Petersen would not answer, only saying there was enough. He didn’t know that I recalled the NY Times had spilled the beans on the initial purchase of 2 million courses. How much have they bought since? Presumably someone decided it would not be in the governments’ best interest for the public to know how much of these unproven products were purchased from a top Dem donor.

In 2018, FDA gave the drug a license. The NYT explained how this happened:

The antiviral pill, tecovirimat, also known as Tpoxx, has never been tested in humans with smallpox because the disease was declared eradicated in 1980, three years after the last known case.

But it was very effective at protecting animals deliberately infected with monkeypox and rabbitpox, two related diseases that can be lethal. It also caused no severe side effects when safety-tested in 359 healthy human volunteers, the F.D.A. said…

The F.D.A. approval of the drug went to Siga Technologies of Corvallis, Ore., a private company that developed the medicine under a federal biomedical defense contract… Research on tecovirimat — originally designated ST-246 — began at the institute (NIAID) after the 9/11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, Dr. Fauci said.

So the taxpayer paid to develop it, and paid through the nose to buy it, Fauci-style, no doubt paying royalties back to the NIAID.

Is there a public health emergency?

Dr. Maldonado asked about the possible designation of a public health emergency of International Concern by WHO, and how this would impact CDC.

Yes, WHO had a meeting to discuss this today, said Dr. Petersen, and CDC participated but he does not know what the result was. EUAs could eventuate if there are emergency declarations.

Dr. Maldonado further noted that the presentation (the severity and overall clinical picture) of moneypox is unexpected for orthopox viruses… and then asks what to do about children. There have been NO child cases internationally (excluding Africa?—Nass) said Dr. Rao. She says cases in Nigeria have been strange too, but I was confused about whether they were equivalent to those in the west or more like historical cases. Dr. Petersen agreed. Melinda Wharton (the new exec secretary of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) as well as having been a member of the FDA’s vaccine advisory committee) says that recommended PPE for moneypox includes gloves and respirator, and was not sure if medical providers would be considered at risk after seeing a patient, particularly if they used no respirator.

Dr. Rao says she will need to get back to the committee on this; the risk exposure assessment is being revised, it seems, by CDC.

Dr. Fryhofer asked about expected adverse events of the proposed drugs. Cidofovir has renal toxicity and is used with cimetidine in an effort to prevent that. Brincidofovir has liver and GI toxicity.

TPOXX is “quite safe and well tolerated” says Dr. Petersen.

However, it was only tested in 359 people in a phase 3 trial, according to the label. At least one experienced EKG (cardiac) changes, and at least one had a drop in their blood count. Another had palpable purpura, which can be quite serious, usually the result of autoimmune vasculitis. Facial swelling suggests anaphylaxis. That is a rate of more than 1% experiencing serious adverse events after only taking the drug for 14 days or less. This was the first lie I caught him on.

Regarding how moneypox spreads, Dr. Rao says “the cases we are aware of are due to skin contact or towels, bedding”. 99% of cases recently were attributed to gay males, I read elsewhere. Dr. Long persists with her original question, asking whether the general US population should be worried about normal casual contacts, like going to the grocery store? Dr. Rao hedges, saying that Americans don’t need to worry about this, and at first said it seems to require “pretty intimate contact.” But then she qualified it, noting, “The risk to the general public at this time is still very low.”

Dr. Rao is asked to comment on a CDC statement that the virus is transmitted through respiratory secretions. She says it is due to saliva, respiratory droplets, implying no airborne spread.

Dr. Sanchez asks how severe the disease actually is. The breifer said hospitalizations have been for pain control, like proctitis. 197 courses of TPOXX have been distributed and 8 cases have received the drug… but none have gotten it iv, so I am again confused by the answer. I think what was meant is that no one has received immune globulin (an iv drug) yet. Dr. Petersen admits cases have been mild.

Dr. Grace Lee says she was exhausted, they have been meeting so much to provide info to the public, and it is time to adjourn.

__________________

My computer saves the day

I am so glad my computer started broadcasting the end of the ACIP meeting when I finally got to my destination—as soon as it connected to wifi and before I had even plugged it in, it began talking to me. I heard the second part of Dr. Brent Petersen’s presentation, and the questions, described above.

Why am I glad? Because I caught Dr. Petersen lying to the ACIP. Twice. He claimed that there were 5.7. cases of myocarditis per 1,000 recipients due to ACAM2000 smallpox vaccine [true], but none from Jynneos.

This reminded me that before I began live-blogging some of the meetings, years ago, I had discovered from reading the abbreviated ACIP meeting minutes [who knows how accurate they are?] that the CDC briefers were lying to the ACIP about anthrax vaccine. It seems they leave nothing to chance in order to get their desired vaccine approvals.

If you read my post on Monkeypox published June 22, you would know that I looked over the 200 page FDA licensure review of the Jynneos smallpox-monkeypox vaccine. That is where I discovered that 2 studies of Jynneos found that 11% in one and and 18% of recipients in the other had developed elevated levels of cardiac enzymes (troponin). This implies heart muscle damage of some kind. It was not studied further, and the reviewers admitted they did not know whether myocarditis was caused by the Jynneos vaccine, or not. And that they would need to perform future surveillance to find out.

I wonder why Dr. Petersen, one of CDC’s monkeypox leads, brazenly lied to the committee about this? Was he so instructed? Or was he incompetent and ignorant? We can probably assume that CDC’s employees know on which side their bread is buttered. Since CDC has made the decision that Jynneos is to be used against monkeypox, despite its apparently awful risk-benefit ratio (see my monkeypox article) I imagine all its employees will be sticking to this story.

__________________

Here is what the Jynneos label (aka package insert, the legal document explaining the studies that led to licensure) has to say. 1.3% of recipients had a cardiac adverse event of special interest, and 2.1% if they had previously been vaccinated for smallpox. That seems pretty serious, and it seems like a very high rate: 1 in 75. From the label:

Cardiac AESIs were reported to occur in 1.3% (95/7,093) of JYNNEOS recipients and 0.2% (3/1,206)
of placebo recipients who were smallpox vaccine-naïve. Cardiac AESIs were reported to occur in
2.1% (16/766) of JYNNEOS recipients who were smallpox vaccine-experienced. The higher
proportion of JYNNEOS recipients who experienced cardiac AESIs was driven by 28 cases of
asymptomatic post-vaccination elevation of troponin-I in two studies: Study 5, which enrolled
482 HIV-infected subjects and 97 healthy subjects, and Study 6, which enrolled 350 subjects with
atopic dermatitis and 282 healthy subjects. An additional 127 cases of asymptomatic post-vaccination
elevation of troponin-I above the upper limit of normal but not above 2 times the upper limit of normal
were documented in JYNNEOS recipients throughout the clinical development program, 124 of which
occurred in Study 5 and Study 6. Proportions of subjects with troponin-I elevations were similar
between healthy and HIV-infected subjects in Study 5 and between healthy and atopic dermatitis
subjects in Study 6. A different troponin assay was used in these two studies compared to the other
studies, and these two studies had no placebo controls. The clinical significance of these
asymptomatic post-vaccination elevations of troponin-I is unknown.

Among the cardiac AESIs reported, 6 cases (0.08%) were considered to be causally related to
JYNNEOS vaccination and included tachycardia, electrocardiogram T wave inversion,
electrocardiogram abnormal, electrocardiogram ST segment elevation, electrocardiogram T wave
abnormal, and palpitations.

None of the cardiac AESIs considered causally related to study vaccination were considered serious.

June 24, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

State Department ‘Illegally Obstructing’ Afghanistan Probes, Watchdog Says

By Kyle Anzalone and Will Porter | The Libertarian Institute | June 23, 2022

The US government’s top oversight official for Afghanistan has accused the State Department and the US Agency for International Development (USAID) of stonewalling ongoing investigations, saying they have refused interviews with staff and even failed to provide “basic information” to assist the probes.

In a letter obtained by Politico this week, Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) John Sopko outlined a series of complaints against State and USAID, claiming the agencies are obstructing audits looking into the final months of the war in Afghanistan, the fall of the US-built Afghan government and the transfer of billions in aid.

“The coordinated efforts by State and USAID officials to deny SIGAR access to information and assistance are unprecedented,” Sopko wrote in the letter, which was addressed to Secretary of State Antony Blinken and USAID chief Samantha Power.

He demanded the two officials “cease their illegal obstruction of SIGAR’s oversight work,” insisting that “The billions of US taxpayer dollars that have been spent and continue to be spent in support of the Afghan government and the Afghan people warrant independent oversight, and the law requires it.”

Though Sopko said the two agencies have “historically… supported SIGAR’s mission” and worked with his office willingly, “inexplicably, this long track record of cooperation seems to have abruptly ended. Agency officials now appear to have adopted a premeditated position of obstruction.”

The IG described several examples of obstruction, including the State Department’s refusal to make staffers available for interviews to discuss Afghan refugees and the conditions they endured after fleeing their home country. Most concerning for Sopko, however, was the agencies’ reluctance to provide even “basic information” on American aid programs meant to support Afghans, as SIGAR is conducting an audit to ensure tax dollars aren’t flowing to the Taliban – which now rules Afghanistan – or other militant groups.

The two agencies have pushed back on Sopko’s allegations, arguing that they have cooperated with SIGAR’s probes, though suggested the IG has acted outside the jurisdiction of his office in some cases.

“State and USAID are committed to assisting SIGAR with its important auditing and oversight role,” a department spokesperson said in a separate letter obtained by Politico, adding “We have had concerns about how some of SIGAR’s requests for information relate to their statutory jurisdiction.”

However, while the officials claimed humanitarian aid programs “do not pertain to reconstruction” and therefore fall beyond the scope of SIGAR’s mandate, Sopko said his office has audited such programs for more than a decade without any objections from the government.

“State and USAID legal counsels’ claim that SIGAR’s jurisdiction does not include such matters is not only contrary to the law, but a gross deviation from over 14 years of precedent set by three prior administrations,” the IG wrote.

June 23, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , | Leave a comment

Met Police Invokes “National Security” about Epstein Meeting with US Senators in the UK

BY WHITNEY WEBB | UNLIMITED HANGOUT | JUNE 13, 2022

A Freedom of Information request filed by UH in connection with Whitney Webb’s upcoming book was blocked by UK Metropolitan police on “national security” grounds. The request sought information on the two sitting US Senators who met with Jeffrey Epstein at a Wexner-owned residence in the UK, a meeting where Met Police officers had provided security.

In connection with Whitney Webb’s upcoming book on the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, One Nation Under Blackmail, Unlimited Hangout filed a Freedom of Information request asking UK law enforcement and the Ministry of Defence the identity of two sitting US senators who were present at Foxcote House in North Warwickshire, UK on September 1, 2002. UH contributor Johnny Vedmore had previously obtained information from eyewitnesses of that meeting that, not only were two US Senators present at that location that day, but that Metropolitan Police officers had supplied security for the meeting. The FOI request was filed to Metropolitan Police, the UK Ministry of Defence and North Warwickshire Police and only a response from the Metropolitan Police was received.

The motive for UH’s FOI request is as follows. It is known that Jeffrey Epstein, as attested to by Epstein’s flight logs, was present in this part of the UK during this same period (from August 31, 2002 to September 2, 2002) and eyewitnesses saw him attend this specific meeting at this location with two attractive and glamorously dressed women on each arm. One of these women was Nicole Junkermann, a former model and apparent intelligence asset as revealed in Vedmore’s previous investigative work. The other woman was described by eyewitnesses as a tall brunette. Per those eyewitness accounts, Epstein personally escorted the two women into the room where the two senators were waiting.

Notably the house where this meeting took place, Foxcote House, has been owned by the family of Leslie Wexner, specifically his wife Abigail Wexner, since 1999. Wexner’s role in financing much of Jeffrey Epstein’s activities, legal and illegal, is a major focus of Webb’s upcoming book and Wexner has encountered considerable difficulty in explaining away his relationship with Epstein, despite the largely servile posture of mainstream media in this regard.

Given the circumstances, it seems highly likely that this meeting was a high-profile instance of Jeffrey Epstein engaging in the sexual blackmail of sitting American politicians. However, due to the well-known scandal around Jeffrey Epstein, his name was not used in our FOI request in order to avoid potentially “spiking” the response.

Despite the omission of Epstein’s name, Metropolitan Police responded to the request stating that they can “neither confirm nor deny whether it holds” the requested information. Their response goes on to state that confirming or denying “whether any United States of America (USA) senators were afforded protection could undermine the safeguarding of national security.” It also notes that it blocked providing the requested information on four other grounds aside from “national security” (five in total), including “international relations”, “law enforcement”, “health and safety”, and “personal information.” It also states that providing the requested information could place “those who are afforded protection, protection officers and members of the public at risk.”

Screenshot of the response from Met Police

UH has since re-filed a new, related FOI request asking why Metropolitan Police officers were providing protection to a meeting where Jeffrey Epstein was present, since his criminal activities are undeniable.

June 14, 2022 Posted by | Book Review, Corruption, Deception, Timeless or most popular | , | 3 Comments

Biden Administration Makes Available 10 Million Doses of COVID Vaccine for Kids Under 5 — Before FDA Authorizes Shot

The Defender | June 9, 2022

The Biden administration today said it made available 10 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines for children under age 5 to states and healthcare workers with “millions more available in the coming weeks.”

The White House unveiled its “Operational Plan” for vaccinating the youngest age group — one week before advisors to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are scheduled to meet to decide whether to grant Emergency Use Authorization for the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna pediatric vaccines for babies as young as 6 months old.

According to the White House:

“If FDA authorizes and [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)] recommends one or both of the COVID-19 vaccines for this age group, it would be a historic milestone in the nation’s fight against the virus — and would mean nearly every American is eligible for the protection that vaccination provides.”

Children under 5 could begin receiving the vaccines as early as “the week of June 20th — with the program ramping up over time as more doses are delivered and more appointments become available,” the White House said.

Senior administration officials told The New York Times orders for the vaccines from states “have been somewhat tepid so far.”

Of the 5 million doses offered last week — prior to today’s announcement — 58% of the available Pfizer vaccines were ordered, and “roughly a third” of the available Moderna vaccines had been ordered.

The vaccines, paid for by the U.S. government, are being made available to pediatricians’ offices, community health centers, rural health clinics, children’s hospitals, public health clinics, local pharmacies and other community-based organizations.

The administration said it “will remain laser-focused on equity and making sure that we reach those hardest-hit and most at-risk communities.”

The plan includes working with programs such as Head Start and the Women, Infants, and Children, or WIC, Program in addition to Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, known as CHIP, and Latino, Black and Native American community programs.

The White House also will focus on parents, especially moms:

“‘What to Expect,’ a platform of over 20 million moms, will author a blog series featuring doctors and other trusted experts answering questions about pediatric COVID-19 vaccines, and how moms, expecting moms, and all parents can get the information they need to get themselves and their children vaccinated; author new articles dispelling myths about the COVID-19 vaccine and children; and create and amplify new What to Expect social media content, reaching moms where they are and fighting vaccine misinformation across all platforms.”

Critics question need, raise safety, efficacy concerns

Many experts have questioned the need to vaccine young children in part because the virus poses little-to-no serious risk to them and in part because, according to the CDC, the majority of children have already had, and recovered from the virus.

Dr. Marty Makary last week told Fox News the COVID-19 vaccines do “not make sense” for most kids.

Makary, a physician and public health researcher at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said:

“If you look at the fact that 75% of kids had COVID as of a CDC study back in February and Omicron has been ubiquitous since then, 80 to 90 plus percent of kids have already had COVID. So we’re talking about immunizing those who are already immune for a lot of people. That just does not make sense.

Others, including Dr. Michelle Perro, a pediatrician, have warned about the risks associated with the vaccine, and evidence the vaccines provide weak protection, especially as they were designed for the original Wuhan strain which has been supplanted by a wave of new strains.

In a letter submitted Wednesday to the FDA, 18 members of Congress addressed a number of concerns about the vaccines.

They asked the agency to, “Please list the medical emergencies of children 0 to 4 years old that enables the FDA to approve the COVID vaccine for children using its EUA.”

In all, the Congress members demanded answers to 19 questions and requested a response before next week’s meeting.

Commenting on today’s announcement by the White House and on its timing — a week before FDA scientists meet to review data on the vaccines — Children’s Health Defense (CHD) Chairman and Chief Legal Counsel Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. called on parents and physicians “now more than ever” to “step into the breach to protect our babies from our government.”

Kennedy said the COVID-19 countermeasures, including the vaccines, were “never about science or public health.”

He added:

“Now they have departed from common sense and into naked cruelty and barbarism. By recommending an unapproved, experimental, zero-liability and high-risk medical intervention for an illness that poses zero statistical danger to that age group, the White House has made itself the enemy of America’s children.

“The Pharma gods have demanded child sacrifice and the high priests of public health have offered a generation of infants. Now more than ever, parents and physicians must step into the breach to protect our babies from our government.”

Kennedy and CHD in February delivered a letter to top public health officials and the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee urging them to reject Pfizer’s application for EUA of its COVID vaccine for children 6 months through 4 years of age.

According to the letter:

“We are writing to put you on notice that should you recommend this pediatric EUA vaccine to children under five years old, CHD is poised to take legal action against you.

“CHD will seek to hold you accountable for recklessly endangering this population with a product that has little, no, or even negative net efficacy but which may put them, without warning, at risk of many adverse health consequences, including heart damage, stroke and other thrombotic events and reproductive harms.”

The FDA was originally scheduled to meet Feb. 15 to review Pfizer’s EUA application for COVID-19 vaccines for children 6 months to 5 years old, but postponed the meeting citing insufficient data. Pfizer resubmitted its application June 1.

Moderna submitted its application for the vaccine for children 6 months to age 6 on April 28, after changing its efficacy claims to meet FDA guidelines.

© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

June 11, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Progressive Hypocrite, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | 1 Comment

Google tells Congress the proposed antitrust bill would hinder its censorship efforts

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | June 9, 2022

Google continues to lobby and campaign against legislative efforts aimed at curbing its monopolistic power, this time openly, in a blog post.

Google claims that antitrust legislation – whose goal is to loosen the stranglehold it has on the market and competitors – would prevent it from censoring “disinformation.”

In the past months, the tech giant has used other avenues as well, from (🛡 fake) grassroots support that it purports to have, to spending millions on professional lobbyists in Washington DC.

In all this, Google has gone for all sorts of “targeted” arguments in an effort to make sure the bipartisan bills never become law. Lawmakers and voters had the chance to hear that if Google is not allowed to run its business unimpeded, exactly as it’s doing now, anything from innovation to national security would suffer.

And now, no doubt addressing that part of its audience that is particularly concerned with the specter of arbitrarily, if at all, defined “disinformation” as internet’s “greatest ill” – this time in the context of geopolitics – Google claims that the bills under consideration in Congress, would, if passed, prevent it from censoring disinformation.

VP of Google’s Privacy, Safety and Security Royal Hansen, claims that the legislation is a risk for US security, for that of its users, while it doesn’t address problems that “Americans care the most about.”

Despite the context of the writeup, Hansen for some reason mentions “privacy, child safety, and inflation.” This Google exec packs a lot of FUD into just a few sentences, to also warn users that some of their favorite products like Search and Maps will get broken – if Google is made to abide by possible future antitrust laws.

Among many other usual talking points that supposedly outweigh the need to regulate Big Tech’s business models Hansen talks about the danger of “rolling back” Google’s “war on disinformation” – that is, the unprecedented levels of censorship visible particularly on YouTube.

These last years, the topics were mostly Covid and US elections, but those are getting a little old; and so Hansen brings the war in Ukraine into the mix – as another reason why the digital market should not be a fair and level playing field for startups and other competitors.

“By prohibiting us from ‘discriminating’ against competitors, the bill would prevent us from taking action against purveyors of malicious content,” writes the Google exec. “Since Russia invaded Ukraine, we have been able to move quickly to limit Russian propaganda and disinformation, even as that content has migrated to new channels. The proposed legislation could undermine this work.”

June 9, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Fauci’s COVID origins coverup spook has resurfaced to misdirect us about the origin of money pox

By Meryl Nass, MD | June 7, 2022

Andrew Rambaut (pronounced Rambo—and like Rambo, he is still in the ring, fighting for the globalists, when he should have taken his toys and slunk away long ago—after being beaten up as one of the stooges who produced the fake Nature Medicine paper on COVID’s origins) has long been associated with a group of virology spooks in Tony Fauci and Jeremy Farrar’s network. The field of evolutionary biology is supposed to tell you where new viruses have come from. But of course, it has been kidnapped to provide specious explanations when the biowarriors need to try and explain their concoctions as having natural origins.

Rambaut was also used to dispute the origins of HIV (as described in my friend Ed Hooper’s book The River ) while teamed up with Eddie Holmes, another Fauci flunkie, more than 20 years ago.

Republican members of Congress want to know what Fauci and his henchmen were up to when they concocted a fake natural origin for COVID, as revealed in the Fauci emails.

Rambaut was one of the 5 authors of that paper, and the paper was highly effective for a bit over one year at keeping a lid on COVID’s lab origin. As the members of Congress wrote:

Andersen and three other doctors on this teleconference [including Rambaut] later published a paper titled “the proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 in Nature Medicine on March 17, 2020. This paper was highly influential in shaping our nation’s response to the pandemic. In the paper, the doctors concluded that “…we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.”[11]

… The Andersen paper led the narrative away from COVID-19’s potential lab origins. As Americans, we are deeply concerned by the appearance of discrepancies that largely influenced our understanding and approach to this virus. As Representatives of the American people, we owe it to them to seek and expose the truth about this virus’ origins wherever those efforts may lead.

Now Rambaut has popped up again, like a jack-in-the-box, to explain how the unexplainable 50 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP mutations) could have happened naturally. He has another bold theory! There was an evolutionary jump!

And Rambaut proffered yet another theory: the virus has been spreading in humans for years; we just didn’t notice it.

Below is a paper published by Portuguese researchers discusing the newly discovered mutations in money pox. They mention Rambaut’s theory, and Rambaut himself provides the first comment below the paper.

Spooks like Dr. Rambaut don’t do this dirty work for nothing. Just last month, he was made a fellow of the Royal Society.

From Wikipedia:

Science reported on 11 January 2020 that Rambaut was the first to publish the genome of the COVID-19 coronavirus after it was sent to him by Edward C. Holmes.[11][12] Holmes has said that it “took 52 minutes from receiving the code [from his Chinese colleague Professor Yong-Zhen Zhang] to publishing” on Virological.[13][14] The BBC Horizon episode The Vaccine stated: “When Chinese scientists published the genetic sequence of a mystery new virus on January 10th 2020, vaccine scientists around the world immediately sprang into action”.[15]

Rambaut was one of the authors of the scientific paper The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2,[16] which concluded that “SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus”.

Rambaut is an attendee of the UK’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE).[17]

Perhaps someone else can look up his recent research grants. Were they from NIH or Wellcome? Being rewarded royally with other peoples’ money is another characteristic of the virology spook group.

June 7, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | 2 Comments